[Originally published, May 2, 2006] In January 1994, I remember visiting the Jakarta office of Mr Irawan Abidin, the former Director of Foreign Information in the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I had just arrived from a two week field trip to the former Indonesian territory of East Timor researching alleged human rights abuses. I had found ample evidence of abuses through the traumatized testimonies of many East Timorese I had spoken with.
Mr Abidin assured me that systematic human rights abuses were not occurring in East Timor and that such claims were spurious accusations orchestrated by discontented Timorese expatriates who were the former ruling elite. I politely explained to him what I had been told in my fieldwork involving interviews with dozens of private citizens, but he insisted that such claims were gross exaggerations and people were basically content in East Timor. He handed me a Ministry publication to support his position and exhorted me to tell the world how content people were with Indonesian rule in East Timor.
In reading Steven Greer’s recent public statement, “Exopolitics or Xenopolitics” where he openly criticizes me as someone supporting xenophobic approaches to Exopolitics, I had a feeling of déjà vu with my earlier meeting with Mr Abidin concerning my research into alleged human rights abuses.
In his May 2 statement, Greer claims:
While there are certainly diverse opinions regarding why any given extraterrestrial civilization may wish to visit Earth at this time in our history, recent public comments by Michael Salla have added a virulent strain of fear-based xenophobia, based on the flimsiest of documentation.
Dr Greer further states:
He has maintained that a nefarious and injurious group of ETs have made a secret pact with covert humans – and have a harmful agenda towards the human race.” This, and more. The Disclosure Project has over 450 military, government and corporate insiders who have first-hand knowledge of actual UFO/ET events and projects. We find it odd that not a single one of these insiders can confirm the xenophobic rumors proffered by Salla.
I accept Dr Greer’s implicit invitation to engage in a public debate with him concerning the evidence supporting the diverse motivations and activities performed by extraterrestrial visitors. I think such a debate is healthy and can lead to greater cooperation between exopolitical researchers and activists who have long been polarized into mutually antagonist camps of those exclusively viewing extraterrestrials as benign visitors helping humanity evolve, and those generally viewing extraterrestrials as committing systematic human rights abuses.
I will avoid personalizing such a debate which can only be a distraction and focus only on the arguments offered by Dr Greer and myself in discussing the substantive issues raised in his public statement and my own public research.
To begin, in his statement Greer explicitly refers to his database of 450 whistleblower cases as the source for his exopolitical view that extraterrestrials visiting Earth are exclusively benign advanced civilizations sincerely desiring humanity to evolve into a mature, sovereign and independent galactic species.
It’s worth pointing out that Dr Greer has only released the identities and testimonies of a comparatively small sample of that database in hisDisclosure book (which has almost 70 testimonies, less than 20% of his alleged database). I have privately corresponded with Dr Greer on a number of occasions where he has repeatedly dismissed the data I have forwarded to him that some extraterrestrials are violating the rights of individuals, and that agreements with covert agencies have indeed been reached where these agencies have become complicit in such violations.
Dr Greer claims that his database of 450 military, government, and corporate whistleblower cases do not support the idea that extraterrestrials are engaging in such human rights violations, nor that some extraterrestrials have reached agreements with covert government agencies. He boldly claims that “not a single one of these insiders can confirm the xenophobic rumors proffered by Salla.”
This is a gross misrepresentation of the data possessed by Dr Greer. This can be easily demonstrated by the case of Lt Col Philip Corso who is prominently featured as a Disclosure Project witness, and is arguably the most widely known and significant whistleblower to ever emerge in UFO research.
According to Greer, Corso did not confirm that some extraterrestrials were engaging in activities that violated individual rights which for Greer are xenophobic claims. That is a gross misrepresentation of Col Corso’s position as evidenced in statements such as the following in his soon to bepublished private notes:
… the aliens have shown a callous indifference concerning their victims. Their behavior has been insidious and it appears they might be using our earth and manipulating earth life. Skeptics will excuse them that possibly they are benevolent and want to help, however, there is no evidence they have healed anyone or alleviated human ailments. On the other hand, they have caused pain, suffering and even death.
I have privately corresponded with Greer on Corso’s testimony but he has repeatedly dismissed this information and now boldly states that not a single one of these insiders can confirm such allegations. As the above quote and other selections from Corso’s testimony demonstrate, Greer is incorrect.
The case of Corso is not isolated. For example, with regard to allegations of human rights abuses and of a shooting war involving extraterrestrials at an underground facility in New Mexico, Dulce, made by whistleblowers such as Phil Schneider, Greer includes these among the list of xenophobic rumors.
Unfortunately, another prominent Disclosure Project whistleblower, Dan Morris, not only confirms the existence of the Dulce facility, but also that Schneider did indeed work there and was eliminated for disclosing classified information about such bases and what had occurred there with resident extraterrestrials.
In Greer’s’ Disclosure book, Morris says:
There are other people who have been eliminated for what they know. One was a friend of mine. Phil Snyder (sic) who worked out here in New Mexico building the tunnels – the biggest one that he was involved with was the Dulce underground facility (Disclosure, p. 359).
Another area where I have privately corresponded with Greer concerns alleged covert agreements between some extraterrestrial groups and covert government agencies. According to Greer’s statement, this is part of the xenophobic rumor mill I am spreading on the flimsiest of documentation.
We do not have to look too far to find evidence of such covert agreements among Greer’s list of Disclosure Project witness. In addition to Corso who claims that the government had been forced into a “negotiated surrender” with extraterrestrials, and of Morris’s claims of extraterrestrials residing at the underground Dulce facility, we find the example of Capt Bill Uhouse, another Disclosure Project witness, who describes how extraterrestrials would come into classified meetings to give hints to scientists and engineers concerning the reverse engineering of extraterrestrial technology.
Similarly, Sgt Clifford Stone has testified how upon his induction into covert projects concerning extraterrestrials, he was taken into a secure facility under the Pentagon where he was taken to have a telepathic communication with a gray extraterrestrial where he blanked out and was then threatened with death if he disclosed what had happened.
The above examples demonstrate that Greer selectively filters out or ignores the testimonies of some Disclosure Project witnesses who describe invasive extraterrestrial behaviors, and agreements between extraterrestrials and covert government agencies.
More significantly, Greer excludes from his database an extensive number of whistleblowers that have publicly discussed extraterrestrials performing egregious activities, e.g., Paul Bennewitz, Phil Schneider, Robert Dean, John Lear, “Connor O’Ryan”, Dan Burisch, Charles Hall and others.
For example, in the case of Charles Hall, Hall described numerous instances where Tall White extraterrestrials willfully intimidated, threatened or injured military servicemen who were unfortunate enough to accidentally run into the Tall Whites that roamed the Nellis AFB hidden facility and deliberately stalked servicemen.
In addition to manipulating his database by filtering Disclosure Project witness testimonies and excluding the testimonies of other whistleblowers revealing abusive extraterrestrial activities and covert government agreements, Greer regularly dismisses evidence from researchers with extensive field work expertise such as Dr David Jacobs, Budd Hopkins, Dr Karla Turner, Whitley Strieber, and others analyzing case studies of abductees whose rights have been systematically violated by extraterrestrials.
Dr Jacobs for example has examined hundreds of abduction case studies over several decades to reach his conclusion that the behavior of extraterrestrials consistently violates accepted human rights standards and is a long term threat to human sovereignty. According to Greer, Dr Jacobs work can be easily dismissed as part of the undocumented xenophobic rumor mill based on flimsy evidence, yet Jacob’s work is well documented.
Also, Greer regularly refers to the Military Abductions (MILABs) phenomenon offered by Dr Helmut Lammer to support his thesis that all alleged abuses attributed to extraterrestrials can be ascribed to MILABs imitating extraterrestrials or to individuals projecting psychological traumas onto benign extraterrestrial visitors. This is a distortion of the evidence provided by Dr Lammer who does not exclude the possibility that extraterrestrials are violating human rights during the abduction phenomenon, only that the military is attempting to replicate extraterrestrial methods and violating human rights in the process.
Furthermore, Greer does not refer to the extensive research of those such as Zecharia Sitchin, Dr Arthur Horn, William Bramley, Jim Marrs, and others who have examined archeological records and argued that humanity has been seeded by extraterrestrial groups who have violently competed among themselves for control of the Earth.
Indeed, these sources point to a long historical presence where humanity has been used as an exploitable resource by some extraterrestrial groups whose motivations and activities are certainly questionable when it comes to the question of human rights violations.
Finally, in addition to dismissing the data on different categories of researchers documenting extraterrestrial violations of human rights in the modern and ancient era, Greer dismisses the testimonies of a great number of alleged contactees describing the nefarious activities of some contemporary extraterrestrial visitors. Contactees such as Howard Menger, Enrique Castillo Rincon, Eduard “Billy” Meier, “Prof Hernandez”, Brian Scott, and many others whose testimonies have been documented and investigated by competent researchers.
In sum, by filtering the testimonies of Disclosure Project witnesses on invasive extraterrestrial activities and covert agreements; excluding the testimonies of whistleblowers openly describing invasive extraterrestrial behaviors; excluding the extensive data offered by reputable researchers of the abduction phenomenon; ignoring the data of exo-archeologists, and dismissing the relevance of many ‘contactee’ testimonies, Greer is engaging in a willful attempt to distort the public conclusions concerning the true motivations and activities of the extraterrestrial visitors.
While his effort to spin data concerning extraterrestrial activities in a positive light may be perceived by some to be well intentioned, it is in reality both naive and dangerous to distort public perceptions in this manner given the extensive data suggesting that extraterrestrials have been involved in systematic human rights violations and that some government agencies have been complicit in these.
Based on the data I have examined in my Exopolitics research, I have arrived at the conclusion that extraterrestrials are as varied as humans in terms of their motivations and interactions with humanity. Some extraterrestrials are highly ethical and principled as Dr Greer contends.
I have pointed out in a number of my research papers that many extraterrestrial groups are advanced evolved beings genuinely wishing to assist humanity in its evolution, and have not entered into covert agreements with government agencies where they believe advanced extraterrestrial technology will be misused by irresponsible government agencies. These extraterrestrials appear to be in the majority which would replicate the social dynamics of human societies where a majority a citizens are law abiding.
This is where in his statement Greer distorts the nuances in my research and argues as follows:
I feel a point has been reached where silence only redounds to the further empowerment of a message of fear, hatred, prejudice – and the unwitting buttressing of the argument for weapons and war in space.
So Greer believes that my analysis buttresses the argument for the weaponization of space. The deliberate targeting of extraterrestrial visitors by covert government agencies using advanced weapons is a major concern which I have pointed out on a number of occasions in my recent papers.
On the other hand, there appears to be a minority of extraterrestrial visitors, who view humans as a biological resource to be exploited and have entered into covert agreements with a number of government agencies who easily exploited due to the latter’s desire for advanced technologies.
Extraterrestrials entering into such agreements have demonstrated little genuine desire to assist humanity in its evolution to a mature planetary civilization. There is credible evidence that covert agreements have led to various government agencies becoming complicit in some of the more egregious extraterrestrial activities such as what had or is occurring at the alleged Dulce facility.
The solution is not a military campaign using space weapons, but a political solution based on political disclosure of the extaterrestrial presence and the public accountability of public officials making key decisions in the management of extraterrestrial affairs.
The truth concerning alleged covert agreements between some extraterrestrial visitors and government agencies makes for a far more complex exopolitical situation than Dr Greer is willing to concede or support. That is understandable since the data is seldom conclusive, important whistleblowers or witnesses are intimidated into silence, which altogether compounds the difficulty of researchers seeking to document their sources and reach reliable conclusions.
Nevertheless, the available data is overwhelming that such agreements exist, and that some extraterrestrial visitors are violating human rights with the complicity of government agencies. Greer laments that:
“The facile acceptance of every story as true- no matter how dangerously xenophobic – is irresponsible and can only serve the agenda of those who wish to see the populace dis-informed, panicked and cowed into eventually accepting a military, space-based solution to the ET problem.”
He further argues that trying to distinguish between different categories of extraterrestrial visitors to discern their motivations and activities is a form of racism. He claims:
Today, we see racist appellations applied to certain alleged ET groups – The Grays! The Reptilians! The Tall White Ones! Must we go down this tired, dirty path again? Must we replay the sordid history of human racism, prejudice, and xenophobia as we begin our first steps towards the stars?
Unfortunately, Greer overlooks the solid research data that points to as many as 60 or more different extraterrestrial races actively interacting with or monitoring Earth. This data is supported by credible whistleblowers such as Clifford Stone and Robert Dean.
To conclude that all extraterrestrial visitors are uniform in their benign activites and motivations is greatly mistaken, and it appears Greer wishes to assert such a fallacious view on the general public and use his status to punish or intimidate researchers arguing a contrary position.
I have presented my research concerning the motivations and activities of different extraterrestrial visitors and their varying degrees of involvement in covert government agreements in a 17,000 word report. The data is impressive and credible, and cannot be simply dismissed by a strongly worded rhetorical flourish of 1400 words as evidenced in Greer’s May 2 statement.
While I respect the important work Dr Greer has done through the Disclosure Project in encouraging many credible whistleblowers to come forward, I disagree both with his research method and his conclusions. Greer claims with regard to my research that:
The facile acceptance of every story as true- no matter how dangerously xenophobic – is irresponsible and can only serve the agenda of those who wish to see the populace dis-informed, panicked and cowed into eventually accepting a military, space-based solution to the ET problem.
Greer’s opinion here greatly distorts the data presented by several of his own Disclosure Project witnesses as explained above, in addition to the work of many other whistleblowers, researchers and witnesses, which are supported to varying degrees by available documentation.
I certainly don’t accept all data concerning alleged abuses by extraterrestrial visitors, but conclude that there exists credible and substantiated data supporting this conclusion. Rather than get into an acrimonious turf war over what can and can’t be said or accepted in exopolitics research, I invite Dr Greer to respond to my criticisms of his research method so I and the general public can gain a more accurate picture of the true motivations and activities of extraterrestrial visitors.
I think a scholarly debate over the pros and cons concerning the data pointing to the varied motivations and activities of extraterrestrial visitors, and their alleged agreements with covert government agencies is highly valuable. Greer dismisses those holding contrary views on alleged extraterrestrial abuses or covert agreements as xenophobic, racist, and supporting military solutions to extraterrestrial visitation.
This strikes me as a form of political spin or “exospin”, that replicates methods used by the mouthpieces of repressive regimes such as Mr Irawan Abidin of the former Suharto government in Indonesia. I contend that exopolitics is the scholarly analysis of all credible data concerning the extraterrestrial presence, not a highly selective approach that supports a preconceived conclusion of only advanced benign extraterrestrial visitors to our planet. The latter is not objective exopolitical scholarship but exospin of the most disingenuous kind.
Michael E. Salla, PhD
May 5, 2006
Forward as you wish. Permission is granted to circulate among private individuals and groups, post on all Internet sites and publish in full in all not-for-profit publications. Contact author for all other rights, which are reserved.